Canon 17-40 f4 L - Skiing

Barks

Barks

Barks

Soldato
Joined
20 Jul 2008
Posts
4,440
Simple question: Will this be a good skiing companion?

For those of you who remember me I have a 550D and after a fair bit of messing around I've ended up back with just the kit lens again.

I was just about to bite the bullet and go for the 17-55 which by general consensus is the perfect everyday lens however it is pricey and the next event I plan on using my camera for is a 2 week Skiing holiday.

I reckon I can live with f4 especially in a snow environment however I do need the lens to be light, portable and fairly resistant. As for photos I'll be taking mainly group/social photos but also jumps etc.

Any thoughts?

Cheers
 
scott212 said:
Simple question: Will this be a good skiing companion?

For those of you who remember me I have a 550D and after a fair bit of messing around I've ended up back with just the kit lens again.

I was just about to bite the bullet and go for the 17-55 which by general consensus is the perfect everyday lens however it is pricey and the next event I plan on using my camera for is a 2 week Skiing holiday.

I reckon I can live with f4 especially in a snow environment however I do need the lens to be light, portable and fairly resistant. As for photos I'll be taking mainly group/social photos but also jumps etc.

Any thoughts?

Cheers
Click to expand...

In my opinion, for that sort of thing you wouldn't be much better off than with the kit lens (image quality aside)... the 17-40 doesn't have a particularly different range and is actually slower at the wide end (not much, and it doesn't make much difference that wide, but...) and will be heavier than your kit lens.

IF you were getting it for image quality purposes, prospective move up to EF-fitment, potential weather sealng, then I could understand, but personally, I wouldn't bother for the kind of use you're talking about.

Either bite the bullet and go for the 17-55 (which is faster, arguably better image quality, and has IS), or keep the kit lens and spend the rest of the money on... whatever else you want to spend it on. I'd buy an external flash (only because last night I was out at a works do without my trusty flash gear and was appalled by the results)...
 
scott212 said:
Simple question: Will this be a good skiing companion?

For those of you who remember me I have a 550D and after a fair bit of messing around I've ended up back with just the kit lens again.

I was just about to bite the bullet and go for the 17-55 which by general consensus is the perfect everyday lens however it is pricey and the next event I plan on using my camera for is a 2 week Skiing holiday.

I reckon I can live with f4 especially in a snow environment however I do need the lens to be light, portable and fairly resistant. As for photos I'll be taking mainly group/social photos but also jumps etc.

Any thoughts?

Cheers
Click to expand...

17-40 would be good, if you own the 17-55 I would take that but I wouldn't buy one for skiing.

The problem is 17-40 is quite boring focal length. When I take my gear skiing I take a 10-20 and 70-200mm f/2.8. The wide angle is great if you get up close and the telephoto is needed to fill the frame a lot of the time. But for sure you can make the middle focal lengths work with care.


EDI: Re-reading you seem not to own the 17-540, then buy the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, the best wide to normal you can buy for Canon crop. The 17-40 really only makes sense on full frame cameras.
 
iamtheoneneo said:
just get a nifty fifty dude, why use that trash?
Click to expand...

WTF? 17-40 is a very good L lens.


Anyway, I use it as my every day lens (rarely leaves my camera). The quality of the images is noticeably better compared to the 50mm F1.8 (much richer colours, makes skies look amazing) and the AF is much quicker too.

It doesn't fit your light category too well IMO though. It is a fairly large lens for the focal range.
 
Last edited:
Is the 17-40 significantly better than the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8?

I've got the Tamron on my 550D and it hasn't left the body since owning it.
 
Trifid said:
Anyway, I use it as my every day lens (rarely leaves my camera). The quality of the images is noticeably better compared to the 50mm F1.8 (much richer colours, makes skies look amazing) and the AF is much quicker too.
Click to expand...
Interesting to hear you say that as I've always thought shots from the nifty-fifty were better but I've never owned both to sompare!

ManCuBuS said:
Is the 17-40 significantly better than the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8?
Click to expand...

Simple answer no, but then significant means different things to different people. I certainly wouldn't swap your 17-50 with it's bigger aperture for a 17-40 L.
 
I use the 17-40 on my crop body for a walkabout lens and a wide on my FF. I like the lens however i havent had much use for it recently. The weddings i have done this year it may have been used once.
Personally i leave it for landscape work now. F/4 in some wedding situations is a little slow however on the slopes i doubt you would have a problem, maybe only when you are inside buildings you may want a faster lens.
 
33L said:
what do you need i can see if i can get some for you as i have both!
Click to expand...

Ideally I want to see comparable shots wide open at 17 and 40 on the L and 18 and 55 on the IS (on a crop body).

I know that's a lot to ask but if you happen to have any lying around I'd be really grateful. I guess if I had to pick what I'd most like to see it's a portrait shot at 40mm on the L.

Cheers
 
I went for the Tamron 17-55 f2.8 thinking it wasn't the best idea to take an expensive lens skiing when I'm closer to beginner level than intermediate. (Skiing that is :D)

What a lens! Honestly blown away by it, the Canon 17-55 f2.8 would have to offer one hell of an improvement to justify the £600 difference in price.
 
I'd say it's down to what you are shooting exactly.

When I've shot Snowboarding, I only really tend to use a wide or standard lens when shooting Park, where you will be up fairly close to people hitting rails and jumps.

For Powder/off-piste stuff, infact even proper pisted runs, a Telephoto is best.

A friend of mine is a Pro Ski Photographer and the 17-40 f/4L was the first lens he bought. I'm not sure he uses it that often, but does praise the fact it's lightweight, small and sturdy.
I guess it depends what you plan to do.
With me, I only take an SLR up the hill with me when I plan to shoot with it, I wouldn't have it with me everyday. If you were planning to have it with you everyday in a pack or something, then the 17-40 would be very useful.
 
Last edited:
I'm going skiing this December (can't wait!), and I'm taking the Canon 10-22mm and 55-250mm onto the slopes with me. Probably mainly the telephoto will be on though as I can see myself taking photos of mates more than the scenery.
Taking the 30mm as well, but not on the slopes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom